As Trump’s rescheduling executive order dominated the cannabis industry’s attention over the holiday period, Germany’s controversial medical cannabis bill quietly entered its most critical phase.
On December 18, the same day the US President issued his surprise executive order, Germany’s Bundestag held the first reading of a critical amendment which will determine the future of its near-billion-euro medical cannabis industry.
Following the brief but fractious 20-minute debate, the medical cannabis amendment now heads to a critical Health Committee hearing on January 14, where 22 expert witnesses will make their case to the Bundestag.
While the second and third readings of the bill are not expected until Spring 2026, potentially terminal cracks are already appearing in between the ruling coalition parties, and the ‘asymmetry’ of the bill’s contents.
‘Struck’s Law Applies’
These cracks may yet prove decisive. Carmen Wegge, the SPD’s spokesperson for legal affairs and cannabis policy, pointed to a fundamental reality of German parliamentary process when she invoked ‘Struck’s Law’, the principle coined by former SPD leader Peter Struck, which states that ‘no law leaves the Bundestag the way it came in.’
As it stands, it appears inevitable that changes to the bill are incoming, not least because of structural issues with the bill in its present form.
Currently, the bill would impose mandatory in-person consultations for patients seeing German doctors, while telemedicine platforms that employ prescribing doctors from outside Germany remain unaffected, a regulatory contradiction experts say is both legally indefensible under EU law and practically impossible to enforce.”
“This regulatory asymmetry, which requires in-person consultations for German doctors while allowing EU telemedicine prescriptions, raises serious questions under EU law, particularly concerning the free movement of services,” Dr. Sebastián Marincolo, Director of Strategic Content & Editorial at weed.de, told Business of Cannabis.
“This imbalance could place domestic providers at a distinct disadvantage – a situation that would be difficult to justify under the EU’s proportionality tests.”
These structural tensions already demonstrate ‘Struck’s Law’ taking effect. Following Cabinet approval in October 2025, the Bundesrat recommended banning EU prescriptions on November 21 to prevent enforcement gaps.
Then on December 3, the Federal Government rejected this proposal, citing EU law obligations a decision that created the regulatory ‘asymmetry’ now threatening the bill’s viability.
Coalition revolt emerges
Alongside these structural conflicts, the December 18 first reading exposed deep fractures within the governing coalition. Health Minister Nina Warken defended the draft by pointing to a 400% surge in medical cannabis imports, spiking from 19 tons to 80 tons in the first half of 2025, arguing it demonstrated widespread abuse rather than legitimate medical need.
But the SPD, the original architects of the CanG act in the previous administration, made their opposition to these changes abundantly clear.
Matthias Mieves, speaking for the SPD parliamentary group, told the Bundestag: “The current draft would also seriously harm ill people who depend on medical cannabis… The SPD will not abandon people who depend on a secure supply.”
Read full report at
